ANIL KUMAR NAHATA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present revisional application, the petitioner prays for quashing the proceeding of Special Case No. 14/16 arising out of G.R Case No. 193 of 2009 in connection with Kotowali P.S case no 33 of 2009 under 406/409 IPC.

(2.) Contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the director of M/s. Nahata Tea Industries (P) ltd., owner of Arihant Tea Estate. A complaint was lodged against the petitioner under section 406/409 IPC by the opposite party no. 2 which was registered as GR case no. 193 of 2009 wherein the opposite party alleged that an amount of Rs. 34,898/- deducted from the employees' share of provident fund contribution by the opposite party was not remitted to the EPF account maintained by the State Bank of India, the opposite party thereby committing an offence under section 406/409 IPC.

(3.) It is submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the company being the owner of the tea estate and the employer within the meaning of section 2(e) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 is responsible for payment of provident fund under the said Act and the petitioner who is only a director of the company cannot be termed as an 'employer' and consequentially cannot be prosecuted under section 406/409 IPC for withholding the provident fund amount of the employees, without fixing criminal liability on the company as an accused.